2021
DOI: 10.2495/ei-v4-n1-14-24
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) Retrofit: a Case Study

Abstract: The retrofit of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) has been applied successfully to properties to help mitigate future flooding and to deliver other benefits to properties, such as improvements in air and water quality, economic benefits and improved business reputation. However, the uptake of SuDS retrofit has been low due to a lack of understanding of the true costs and benefits and concerns about long-term maintenance. This study presents a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of the monetary and non-monetary value… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 15 publications
(30 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Since consumers are usually faced with the need to solve a major flooding event that may have invaded their property, it is usually a huge commitment to decide on the implications of investing in a scheme or other available alternatives to mitigate the effect of flooding events. This process is largely characterised by extended problem solving and CBA considerations, which have been expressed in the details of earlier research conducted by the authors [45].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since consumers are usually faced with the need to solve a major flooding event that may have invaded their property, it is usually a huge commitment to decide on the implications of investing in a scheme or other available alternatives to mitigate the effect of flooding events. This process is largely characterised by extended problem solving and CBA considerations, which have been expressed in the details of earlier research conducted by the authors [45].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%